Yes I can certainly understand this as the time factors correlate.
500 foot encounters (while they certainly can and do happen at Interstate
speeds) are more challenging for the enforcement officer vis-a-vis coming up against any countermeasure(s). At 85 feet (or more) per second closure rates it certainly leaves less
time for their speed measuring devices to obtain accurate readings especially when cosine errors may rapidly develop (which as you already must know always favor the driver/targeted vehicle).
I believe Radar Roy and the Veil Guy already demonstrated this in Radar Roy's Veil G4 product announcement/demonstration video and Veil Guy interview
Some initially mis-took this video to be an actual test. It was not, it was an announcement video. His test results were published at a different time.
Obviously if that run was conducted at a slower speed (say 25mph) there is a distinct possibility that the PT would have occurred somewhat farther away. However, it did effectively demonstrate the Veil as a countermeasure (and in fact any laser countermeasure) would tend to perform better at higher speeds simply because of the time factor it takes for the speed measurement device to actually function and perform it measurement. Also at higher speeds it may very likely be harder on the officer to get a fixed target of good return. Again Veil reduces or eliminates those targeting choices allowing any active countermeasure (ALCM) to perform its job more efficiently.
, states, it's simple
PS: Certainly CP also understood and expressed
when he first formally evaluated Veil G2
, a good number of years ago. And believe me, he was very
skeptical, initially, given that so many past claims of certain "passive" RADAR countermeasures
(didn't repeatedly test out
), but that's another story